Uyombo, a small coastal village in Kenya, Kilifi County, has recently sparked unrest due to uncertainty in talks of a nuclear power plant coming to the area. While the government of Kenya promises jobs, development, and affordable energy, many residents say they’ve been left out of the conversation. As Kenya pushes forward with its first nuclear project, the people of Uyombo are asking what progress really means and who gets to define it.
Residents of Uyombo are mainly dependent on fishing and mangrove ecosystems hence fear exclusion. Evocative voices claim they are being treated “like guinea pigs” as land clearing began under the guise of meteorological work. A petition filed in late 2023 challenges rushed public consultation and inadequate free, prior, and informed consent processes. A parallel 2023 lawsuit seeks a judicial injunction, arguing that environmental assessments and compensation mechanisms fail against international best practices.
At its heart, the question remains: who truly decides what happens in Uyombo village. Community activists say the answer must be resounding and inclusive, rather than transactional. Kilifi’s beaches and reefs support local eco-tourism and fishing. Conservationists warn a nuclear plant’s thermal discharge could elevate water temperature, harming coral ecosystems. Similar worries are playing out at Egypt’s El Dabaa nuclear facility, where ocean cooling has prompted scrutiny for potential marine ecological disarray. Watamu Marine National Park, Arabuko-Sokoke forest, and mangroves at Mida Creek are UNESCO-listed and biodiverse hotspots; any ecological imbalance could impact fisheries and tourism, threatening livelihoods in Kilifi.
The Government of Kenya though it’s spokesperson, insists international standards are being met. Phase Two (2025–2027) includes establishing a national nuclear regulatory authority with IAEA oversight. The IAEA itself notes that Uyombo was selected following preliminary health and biodiversity assessments—but called for “proactive stakeholder engagement” before construction begins.
Kenya is not alone in this path. South Africa has extended its Koeberg nuclear plant’s license to 2044 after rigorous seismic and safety evaluations. Evidence from Koeberg’s 40-year operation and Pakistan’s El Dabaa (slated for first power in 2026 with modern VVER-1200 reactors) offers both a roadmap and cautionary tale.
The plant promises 1,000 MW of baseload power, nearly a third of Kenya’s current 3,300 MW grid capacity—reducing reliance on costly imports. It also pledges 10,000 jobs and new medical and agricultural uses, such as radiotherapy and food sterilization. However, at Sh500 billion, the cost is comparable to Egypt’s $28.75 billion El Dabaa project and dwarfs Ghana’s planned small modular reactors (SMRs) estimated at hundreds of millions.
Ghana’s SMR approach, featuring a NuScale VOYGR-12 unit signed in Nairobi in August 2024, offers a scalable and lower-risk model. SMRs promise flexibility and reduced upfront costs compared to traditional plants.
Kenya joins regional counterparts in its nuclear push. Egypt’s El Dabaa project, financed 85% by Russia, is expected to deliver 4,800 MW by 2029. Ghana is also advancing with SMRs. Nigeria’s Geregu and Itu reactor initiatives with Rosatom underscore emerging concerns about debt, transparency, and governance. South Africa’s Koeberg, providing 5% of national electricity, offers tested insights. Built to withstand seismic events and operating for nearly 40 years, including continued license extensions – its performance suggests that nuclear energy can be safe and strategic when properly managed.
Kenya’s nuclear ambitions are entwined with global politics. The World Bank lifting its ban on nuclear financing earlier this month, is a prospective funder alongside bilateral sources but dependence on large loans may increase debt vulnerability. International players like China, Russia and the US, vie for influence across Africa’s nuclear market. Independent voices highlight that Kenya’s choices will shape more than energy; they’ll shape geopolitical alignments.
The two-phase IAEA-aligned roadmap is logical, but community consultation must move beyond box-ticking to genuine participation. Comprehensive environmental assessments with third-party review are essential. Lower-cost SMR alternatives, particularly as Ghana and Rwanda adopt them—offer useful references. Renewables remain central and Kenya already leads Africa in geothermal and has robust solar and wind capacity. Nuclear must complement, not crowd out – these cleaner, community-friendly options.
Ultimately, Uyombo’s future exemplifies a broader challenge: how African nations balance rapid industrialization, climate action, and social equity. As Kenya chisels its nuclear path, transparent, inclusive, and ecologically sensitive leadership will determine whether the project is remembered for empowerment or for exclusion and environmental cost.
